Langley said that as clearly visible Flock cameras become more common in cities and neighborhoods, ordinary people increasingly view the company as a target for privacy concerns, external and broader technology concerns, external.
“When people can see our cameras, they are more likely to become angry,” Langley said.
The United States does not have comprehensive federal laws governing the collection, use, and sale of personal data, leaving many people concerned about how surveillance information is handled.
Langley recalled meeting a woman in Cleveland who was a vocal opponent of Flock cameras in her community. When he asked why she objected to the technology, she said it was ultimately a tool that police could use to “abuse their power.”
According to Langley, police officers “feel the same way” about the risk of abuse.
In conversations with law enforcement officials, officers often described colleagues by saying, “I knew that guy wasn’t good,” but acknowledged there was no way to prove it.
Those concerns led to Flock’s new auditing capabilities, which became available as an optional feature earlier this year.
The system automatically creates audit logs of searches conducted on Flock’s platform and flags unusual or potentially unauthorized search behavior.
Most law enforcement customers activated the feature when it became available. After discovering that misuse was widespread, Langley decided Flock should make auditing a standard part of its platform.
Langley said police officers who abuse their positions are “terrible” and should face consequences beyond losing their jobs.
“If someone wants to take the lead in removing abusive police officers, sign me up,” Langley said. “We trust these people to carry deadly weapons.”
“I think cameras are far from lethal weapons, but they are very powerful tools. We need to take extraordinary responsibility for how they are used.”
Source: www.bbc.co.uk